Views on the Latest Regulations

When I attended the U.S. EPA-hosted PFAS Summit held at the Horsham, PA high school auditorium on July 25, 2018, the education I received from state and municipal leaders focusing on the local problem was more than just a professional briefing. It was ominously personal, due to the fact that the Water Online editorial office where I work and drink water every day is served by a utility sitting smack-dab in the middle of one of the most concentrated PFAS hotspots in the U.S.

By now, just about everyone in the U.S. has heard about Flint, Michigan’s water woes. Despite the many issues raised by that incident, urban water systems are not the sole reason the 2017 Report Card from the American Society of Civil Engineers gives the U.S. drinking water infrastructure an overall “D” grade. Hidden within that disheartening rating are the harsh realities faced by rural water systems.

It’s no secret that the U.S. EPA has changed course in the last year. But how have those changes affected local water and wastewater treatment operations? And how are those operations going to evolve along with the federal agency?

New analysis has found that perfluorinated compounds could be more than 20 times as prevalent in drinking water as previously thought. Will this revelation spur new regulatory action? And if so, what should that look like?

The legislative body responsible for ensuring that the federal government remains accountable has recently issued a report on the nation’s lead contamination problem. Its recommendations may be what finally save the country’s drinking water.

Everyone must answer to someone — even the rule-makers themselves. While it may seem to water and wastewater utilities that the U.S. EPA is the end of the line, there is yet another government agency that holds the EPA's feet to the fire.